« first day (2477 days earlier)      last day (1443 days later) » 
00:00 - 19:0019:00 - 00:00

12:00 AM
It's nice when that whole bundle of roles that for some reason often get shoved on a GM can actually devolve to the people who're best suited to execute that role.
@nitsua60 quite
speaking of games @nitsua60 -- you were thinking about running something for the Oz/Guamanian folks, what's that look like? (I'm down for joining, as long as the time is semi-workable ofc)
@Shalvenay That's true, I'd forgotten about that. But I'm certainly happy to. My work-day is much more flexible during the summer, so I wonder if my morning/their evening could work?
@nitsua60 that'd be a good idea to float by them -- a Saturday or Sunday morning could be made to work for me
@Shalvenay Sadly, those are bad for me. Summer, plenty of weekends where we're traveling, or the kids just want to up-and-go.... you know the deal.
@nitsua60 ah. yeah, I'll have to bow out then because I have to run a more rigid work schedule for my own sake
12:27 AM
@nitsua60 What were you thinking about running?
@Miniman I dunno. A lil' something-something. This stems from the fact that when I ran a 5e intro back in Jan/Feb/whenever the time I was able to run wasn't great for some people across the world. Now, with my summer schedule, I'd be happy to run something shortish (say, 6 sessions or so) for people from across the world who're interested. (cc: @trogdor @Adeptus @otherAustraliansICan'tRemember @SomeoneHere'sFromThePhillipinesIThink @etc.)
12:55 AM
I can possibly do a Monday/Tuesday/Thursday evening
(wednesday is computer games, friday is family movie night, weekend is often busy)
@Adeptus [crosses fingers that "family movie night" is when Adeptus&fam make home movies, rather than sitting and watching as a family.]
Don't correct me if I'm wrong. I like my head-canon right where it is.
@BESW Where's that one from?
That's Sparky Sparky Boom Man from Avatar: The Last Airbender.
1:30 AM
Mmm headcannons
Some very nice ones in today
1:48 AM
@Forrestfire Wait, fidget spinners aren't usually enchanted?
2:19 AM
[they didn't]
hey there @Papayaman1000
@Shalvenay why hello
how're things going?
2 hours later…
5:01 AM
OK... I'm not sure why, or how, but the last message I saw was about "WoW 2"... then in the space of 2 minutes, the next 48 hrs loaded
Different room... wow2 is in the Not a Bar
Yes. Just noticed haha
2 hours later…
7:15 AM
13th Age looks like a very fun game, based on the SRD. Seems like the defining feature is "DnD, except we don't do X, Y or Z wrong" which is nice.
A lot of the "fixes" seem to be of the "obvious patch" variety but that's unavoidable I guess.
Some highlights of 13th Age for me include replacing skills with a short list of player-written backstory elements, and keying extra effects off attacks based on the raw d20 roll in addition to the ordinary "check if you hit" part.
And I can't say enough about the One Unique Thing.
@BESW I'm actually slightly skeptical about the raw d20 thing. It does sound good to me because I'm pretty good at remembering rules, but I wonder if my co-players will ever learn to remember to check if they roll, for example, an even number.
It's quite simple, especially at low levels where you only have a couple of triggers
It's an extra fiddly bit, yeah, but I found it worked because it added excitement to a single event rather than adding many extra events (eg, the movement economy is much simpler because you can just have stuff happen off the attack).
And only some classes use this mechanic, so your players can choose to be someone else if they don't like it.
7:22 AM
Yeah, I don't have an issue with it personally.
I didn't quite get the workings of Icons yet, but they sound interesting too. Like little bits of characterization with codified mechanical effects.
Icons are tricky. A few class features do something with them, otherwise they're mostly improv hints, which can be hard to utilize.
My players are mostly of the variety that's only ever played these DnD-style reasonably combat-heavy romps and don't fancy themselves playing a combat game. They're really averse to adding more rules to social situations, which bugs me somewhat.
Or non-combat situations, in general.
I don't think they'd accept icons that easily anyway.
So they don't want another combat game, but don't care for non-combat rules?
Accidentally a word
I guess they're content playing DnD with a very liberal dose of GM fiat, which is less appealing to me.
In published intro adventures for 13A, they use Icon rolls as a source of magic items, when circumstances allow.
7:32 AM
In my understanding Icons are still VERY high up on the fiat tower; they're... more like nudges for the GM to guide the scene or story in certain directions. Kind of like an improv comic asking for suggestions from the audience.
"I need another character for this scene, can someone roll their Icons and tell me who the character is going to be connected to?"
@BESW But there's a roll, and if it hits, the GM has to provide aid to the player, right? That's a pretty far cry from DnD where the GM can pretty much decide everything outside combat.
Strictly speaking, D&D 3.5 (for example) has even more non-combat rolling and less GM fiat; it's just okay with you ignoring that.
@kviiri "Should", not "has to".
Ah, okay. I'm not very well-versed with DnD other than 4e and 5e.
And as I recall most Icon rolls are called for at the whim of the GM. Can a player even make an untriggered Icon roll?
7:35 AM
It's quite common not to use up all the Icon relationship rolls.
@Magician Fair point.
@BESW You typically roll all your relationships at the start of a session, or at its end if that's easier.
So the GM can see you have, say two Orc King 6s and a 5 with the High Druid, which shapes the adventure
Ah, right.
It's been a long time.
Items like Amulet of Health and Gauntlets of Ogre Power that set a character's stats bother me. From a character building point of view it makes sense to make a fighter with 8 Str and hope for a Str setting item. I wish it did +X to stats instead to avoid situations where the Str item goes to the cleric because it provides more benefit there than for the fighter. Am I missing something?
@nwp That might make a good main-site question.
Maybe under the tag.
7:38 AM
@nwp They probably wanted to avoid characters exceeding a certain threshold with their stats.
So you don't get Str 24 fighters (I don't actually know 5e numbers)
I guess one reason why I like combat in DnD more than anything else is that it's sort-of guaranteed to be fair. In non-combat situations where we tell the GM we do something, the GM makes us roll, and we have no idea what's going on or what number we need to hit, and the GM all that often doesn't know either and sort of decides everything on the fly on a whim.
I think that's "transparent," not "fair." Very little of D&D combat is "fair."
There probably are guidelines for that sort of thing. There certainly are in 13A - default difficulties for each tier of environment.
And it sounds like a GM playstyle thing exacerbated by systems that make a fetish of GM secrecy.
Well, yeah. Sorry about ranting, btw. I'm just frustrated I'd like a more transparent game but my party likes secrecy (without proper consideration of how it effects the game, IMO).
7:41 AM
@Magician I don't think so. You can only increase your stats up to 20 with ability increasing features from your class. And then there are those belts that are all better than what you can naturally do, so they all give ridiculous stats.
I'm on record as being a fan of secrecy only when I can point at a particular constructive reason for that particular instance benefiting from the secrecy.
What I mean is, I think it's mostly done by them because of a gut-feel, not by design.
@nwp Ah. Right. Well, I suspect in that case the answer is "because that's how they worked in AD&D." And PCs shouldn't be able to count on getting these items, for obvious reasons. For the record I'm not a fan of them either.
@kviiri Aaaand that's pretty much my main problem with 5e. It can work just fine, but it doesn't encourage "good" or even thought-out playstyles. So players fall into all the traps of D&D all over again, that we've had decads to work out and understand.
@Magician Totally agreed.
In sharp contrast to that, 13A is all about understanding and avoiding these pitfalls. In some ways, it's like playing a heavily house-ruled game of D&D, fine-tuned to provide a specific experience.
7:48 AM
DnD 5e is not a single game anyway, it's a vast, continuous probability distribution of games with slight but meaningful variations in style. When you give a bunch of people the books and ask them to read them (and the stars align weirdly and they all actually do!) each person's DnD 5e wave-function collapses to a point in DnD space that matches their idea on how the game is to be played with infinitesimal chance of two views actually agreeing.
@Magician Yeah. I guess it helps that it borrows heavily from 4e. In retrospect, I think I would enjoy 4e's clear focus...
@kviiri Coming from years of frustrations with system mastery in 3.5, the clear focus was probably 4e's biggest single selling point for my group.
...and the setting, for me. Love Points of Light.
@BESW I think most of the people in my group would understand my views on gaming better if they knew what "system mastery" meant :) I haven't been there myself, but reading this site for a few years has been quite an educational experience on the workings of 3e and 3.5e.
In our final 3.5 game, the straw that broke the camel's back, we had someone who really wanted to play a monk who was learning to turn into a dragon (awesome concept, good defenses, but the mechanics meant they could barely hit anything), someone who'd created a caster who spammed massive amounts of nigh-unstoppable damage...
...and someone who wanted to play a fire mage because it was a desert themed campaign--but in 3.5, desert themed meant everything had fire resist so they had to spend all their resources overcoming fire resist instead of actually doing things that'd make the character cool or effective.
@BESW 5e has a feat for that, so it's good to see they learned a bit from past issues.
So encounter design was a nightmare.
Monsters which attacked hard enough to challenge the monk squashed the other two. Monsters which didn't die in the first round to the boomstick had godly levels of hp that the other two couldn't make a dent in. Monsters with fire resist made the mage happy because his feats were useful, but he shouldn't have had to spend all his feats on that in the first place.
7:58 AM
I think I will house-rule that the belts give +2, +4, +6, ... Str instead. I don't want to punish players for buffing their primary ability scores.
At another point, instead of the boomstick we had a grappler who made the monk even less useful because the grappler attacked a lower defense than the monk so if I wanted to challenge the grappler the monk couldn't hit anything even more than usual.
And if I set defenses so the monk could hit 'em, the grappler would hug them to death before the monk's tiny damage did anything.
(And while the grappler was hugging them, the monk's high defenses weren't needed.)
Our first party in 4e, we did synergy. It got scary effective and was a ton of tactical fun.
@nwp At what level are the belts going to be available to the players? Fifth, tenth?
@BESW No chance to give the monk an item of balance that increased to hit to grappler level and decrease defense to grappler level?
@kviiri I have no clue.
While I see what you're getting at, I don't think having a Str 8 fighter for the first n levels of the campaign just to have it topped for free later on is a good strategy.
I mean, it sounds like such a terrible strategy I wouldn't really worry about players unbalancing the game with it.
@kviiri The 21 str belt is rare which is the same rarity as a +1 armor or +2 weapon, so I imagine it could happen relatively early.
8:03 AM
@nwp Are you the GM?
@kviiri Gosh, that sounds like how some editions of D&D "balance" wizards. "Sure, you have Power Like Unto the Gods at level 15, but you were really pathetic at level 2. That's balance, right?"
@Magician I would be, yes.
@BESW "But you earned it."
@nwp In which case it's entirely up to you when or if these belts show up.
@nwp If you use the magic item drop tables in the DMG, it's on the same table as +2 weapons, though. But yeah, it's a possible outcome in the low-challenge trasure hoards.
@BESW Yeah, it's terrible design anyway.
...now I'm writing up a minigame called "Quadratic Squishy."
8:08 AM
Final Fantasy series has a recurring class "Onion Knight" whose shtick is just that, they're abysmal at low levels but get a massive power spike when near their level cap. I seriously hope it's meant to be a joke class.
Ah, the Magikarp syndrome.
Hey, Magikarp at least has the basic decency to evolve after just a reasonable amount of grind and into a Pokémon that's not absurdly powerful ;)
@nwp If a X Str belt becomes a +X-19 Str belt, what do I do with the Headband of Intellect that sets Int to 19?
That one would actually be a reasonable item to wait for as an Eldritch Knight.
Guess +X-17 is the way to go.
8:24 AM
@BESW The momentum thing seems like a fun idea for a rogue.

You start with 2 Hero Potential and 1 Sesquipedalian Power.

Give your wizard a pretentious name and a narrow magic speciality, then venture into the dungeon with your fellow squishies!

When you encounter a threatening situation, you must Dare Chance: roll 1d6; if you roll equal to or under your HP, gain 1 HP. If you roll over your HP, lose 1 HP or spend 1 SP to Cast a Spell (see below). If you roll a 6, you die too quickly to Cast a Spell.

Cast a Spell: describe how your magical prowess got you out of that jam and roll again. If you roll over your HP again, you may
@BESW Survival unto even 3 HP seems like an insurmountable obstacle.
> Errata: Each time you gain 1 HP, multiply your SP by 2 or add 2 SP, whichever is better.
@kviiri That's kinda the point.
@BESW I was going to ask about this, thanks!
Oh, you multiply the current SP, not the theoretical maximum, which isn't tracked, I get it now.
Needs a table for random wizard generation
For quick character introduction
8:36 AM
> Errata 2: When you have 0 Hero Potential, you die. Make another wizard and start again, unless you're the last un-retired wizard.
@Magician I'm open to suggestions for silly names and ridiculously magic specialities.
I figure 2d6 for a two-part name (silly name and descriptive quality) and 1d6 for the speciality.
d10 funny hats table, d10 wizard specialties table, d10 honorific table, arrange as preferred. d10 table for name syllables, use the same dice in the same order - end up with three-syllable name.
@BESW If I roll above my HP and roll to avoid a jam successfully, do I gain HP?
also needs an encounter table. Same principle: d10 location, d10 monster, d10 complication. d10 table for adventure name, again use same dice and apply three times
@kviiri So you roll over your HP, and choose to spend a SP to Cast a Spell instead of losing 1 HP, and your re-roll from Casting a Spell is under your HP? Yes, you get 1 HP and multiply your SP by 2 or add 2, whichever is better.
@kviiri I think it's just a reroll, you don't actually get out of the jam unless you succeed
8:41 AM
@BESW Yeah, this exactly.
@nwp This question somewhat answers that. It basically says that the stats gained are not as useful as they seem and meta-gaming by hoping for such an item doesn't happen.
> Monster table: roll d10 and check:
0: Owlbear
1: Bugbear
2: Bear zombie
3: Bear Grylls
4: Bear grills
5: Polar bear
6: Tropical bear
7: Cartesian bear
8: Bear back
9: Ball bearings
Well, I see the good ol' meme arrow doesn't do a quote block on the chat as I though. :P
Hats: 1. Two-pointed; 2. Unidentifiable, squished; 3. Top hat smoking like a chimney; 4. Upside-down crab tied by a string; 5. Ushanka; 6. Spinning sombrero; 7. Backwards cap; 8. No hat, wild hair; 9. Hat of Invisibility - makes the top of your head invisible; 10. Billiard balls floating around your head.
@kviiri No partial quotes, have to put one > in front of the message.
@nwp Thanks!
Have to remember that from now on.
9:00 AM
Wizard Specialties: 1. Igneomancy - fireball juggling; 2. Cricetomancy - hamster summoning; 3. Hybridology - make your own owlbear; ...need to go make dinner now
9:35 AM
You should be able to wear a fez
is it there where I heard about the criminal bears RPG?
@AnneAunyme you mean Honey Heist?
here's a link if you are searching for it: imgur.com/gallery/Zpg4G
@Szega That game seems sweet as honey.
@kviiri its simplicity sounds refreshing. no rules arguments or optimising, just 'YOU ARE A GODDAMN BEAR'
9:52 AM
(sadly, the bigger-resolution version of this image was 404)
10:37 AM
@kviiri gotta have > on the first line :)
i have used my ⚡ MOD POWERS ⚡ to edit it because clearly I have gone mad with power.
Speaking of going mad with power, I posted this meta last night in which I have (not necessarily) gone mad with the power of potentially adding a super helpful new feature, please check in and let me know if you've got any good ideas of what we should write:
Q: Should we add a [rules-as-written] tag warning, and what should it say?

doppelgreenerI’ve recently discovered Stack Exchange has a feature called tag warnings which cautions a person with further information about how a tag should be used. Tag warnings look like this: This example comes from Biology SE’s [species-identification] tag. You can try it out yourself here — click in...

@doppelgreener You are not a monster... yet. But don't push it! :P
@kviiri 🐲
@doppelgreener I actually saw this and got me thinking, do we have a warning on missing system tag?
@kviiri We don't, though that would be a double-up of features I am not sure exist yet.
Of course that'd require for us to have a separation of tags between system tags and non-system tags.
10:54 AM
And new tags would have to be interpreted one way or the other before classification...
It could be closely connected to the behaviour of meta's four required tags, of which one is required, but with the option to submit without (but a warning first).
11:35 AM
@doppelgreener Maybe remove the other > in the message.
Achievement unlocked: Troll of Madness: Encourage a moderator to go on a power trip.
11:57 AM
@nwp oops! good call.
@nwp hahahaha
@Szega that's the one I was talking about, indeed!
Not sure if the Tengu question is on-topic here
Instinctively I would have say no, but apparently there is a "Tools and equipment used while playing table-top RPGs (including running them online)" line among what is on-topic
12:42 PM
I'm a bit conflicted about this, too. Alpha version of a software not working well... sounds better handled elsewhere, I think.
1:25 PM
Thats not different than roll20 or anydice questions.
Though he said its an alpha version, the software is on 6.x already, so it has stable versions.
1:57 PM
Any mods here? Big discussion over at rpg.stackexchange.com/a/103212/31589
Not sure how to flag for "this should be moved to chat"
every blue moon a moderator shows up in here, so you're in luck
@BlueMoon93 when the conversion is going back and forth, the link automatically shows up.
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Bad keyword in answer, bad keyword with email in answer, email in answer: Must a Ranger's spellcasting focus be druidic, or can it be arcane (or even holy)? by wilfred on rpg.SE
@nwp Clever girl....
2:13 PM
the ultimate d10 random table?
Continuation of Quadratic Squishies dev, above.
[tests] Master Nonawan, Tea Wizard with Wild Hair, faces the Ungrateful Dead in a Jungle Temple with a State-of-the-Art Security System.
Yup, I think that works.
@BlueMoon93 Use a custom mod flag and write that the conversation should be moved to chat. Mods are automatically notified if there are 20 messages under a post in under 72 hours I think. And the participants get an automatic "Don't you want to go to chat with this? Please don't use the comments for longer discussions" kind of text with an automatic link to do this after they wrote 3 messages or so in a row, I think
@Secespitus If they didn't click it and kept the conversation going, then it won't come back.
@NautArch Ah, interesting, thanks. I never tried that and haven't heard of this.
2:34 PM
@nwp We had this situation in my last party: I was a DEX-based fighter, the other fighter was STR-based. Both started with 16 in our primary stat and while I threw the first two ASIs into my stat, the other fighter took synergizing feats. Then a belt of some giant's strength dropped =\
(It was rolled off the module-specified table, so I don't fault the GM. Just highlights the problem you're talking about.)
Also, after thinking about it for a bit, a fighter with 8 Str isn't that bad actually. Just use finess weapons and light armor until you find such a belt or gauntlet.
@nitsua60 :|
Assuming you find the belt or the gauntlets. Tabletop games aren't like computer rpgs. You can go adventuring as much as you want, but unless the system lets you build magic items yourself, the GM can always just refuse to hand out those items.
@nitsua60 The [Object] of [Thing] [Stat] items are very good for characters with MAD. In an AL group, I had Gauntlets of Ogre Power on a Druid that I later traded to an Eldritch Knight. It will allow him to forgo Strength-bumps in favor of Intelligence. I debated trading it with the Barbarian, but he was going to natural blow past it anyway.
@nwp I'd consider "+2 up to 22," "+4 up to 24," "+6 up to 26," then.
2:41 PM
@nitsua60 That would be a sane item, yes.
@T.J.L. GoOP are 19, yes?
@nitsua60 Yeah.
@Magician to the extent that 26 str is "sane," sure =)
From what little I know of 5e, people can't normally have their stats go above 20, correct?
It was AL play, and it was still early enough that he could reshuffle, so he did. Dropped his STR back to 14 or so (so he wouldn't be totally impotent in an AMF), but used the recovered points to bump his INT a bit.
2:42 PM
@Magician Correct. Mundane stat-progression caps at 20.
@Magician There are some tomes that let you go above I think
@Magician Other than Barbarians, yes. They can hit 24 in STR and CON.
(I.e. the stat-increases that one takes as part of class progression.)
And is 26 Str effectively +3 to attack as compared to 20?
2:43 PM
@T.J.L. True--their L20 "capstone" is bumping both to 24.
Neat, a must-have item that ignores your previous choices.
@Magician depending on what you're attacking with. Melee or thrown items.
@Secespitus The star card from the deck of many things also lets you boost a stat up to 24
@Adam The deck of many things is pretty creepy... I don't think my players will ever get their hands on that one. Just like I won't every give them the belts
I adore the deck of many things. I'm itching for a game to give it out.
2:46 PM
@Secespitus GM control really is the way to manage it... especially if you set the players' expectations in advance. Telling them "Nope, I think these are cheesy and they won't appear in my game" is helpful.
@Secespitus Deck of I Feel Like Letting a Three Year-Old Tear Up My Campaign Notes and Rearrange Them.
@Secespitus The Deck of Many Things is the perfect thing to... gift a party that's being going off the rails for awhile now.
@T.J.L. We are all completely new to the game, but they have a similar take on it like me and making your choices useless by giving out x strength to someone is not the way to go
It works just fine if there are no campaign notes, though.
@nitsua60 Exactly my feeling. It's an instant plot derailment.
For a one-shot it might be funny
2:48 PM
A bit like chaos magic in that regard
@Secespitus Draw a card at the start of the one-shot. Oh, looks like you're dead forever now. Enjoy the rest of the game!
I don't worry about plot derailment--my players can take care of that just fine =D
It's the "wait, what game did we decide to play together?" derailment that bugs me.
"You know what guys? I don't feel like prepping. Everyone makes a couple quick characters and you get a deck of many things"
have any of you used the deck of many things before?
@Adam nope - but seems like it could be a fun thing to introduce with characters (and their players) who like to gamble.
@Adam Yes, but only as @Secespitus describes it, as a one-shot. Each character got one draw, and we figured things out from there.
2:50 PM
It seems to me like there is this agreement that the deck will absolutely destroy your game despite the fact that few people have ever even tried to use it in any capacity
I've used it, and been in campaigns which use it.
Both 3.5 and 4e.
@Adam I read the descriptions and most of them felt like destroying a lot of what a player and a DM might have built up until that point
Heck, I would give it out in a main campaign with the primary reason of saying "yeah, I was a DM and gave out a deck of many things" and so my players could say "I got to draw from the deck of many things".
It's not something to throw in casually, for sure, especially the 3.5 version.
We've used it in a 3.5 campaign. It's certainly dramatic... but it's cheap drama.
2:52 PM
@Adam Never run it myself, have had it show up in pre-teen campaigns/games.
@Adam Are you prepared to add "And we started a new campaign with the next session"?
@Secespitus If that's what happens. Yes. Or the players keep playing that campaign. It's up to them.
It's the essence of the Universal Rule of Randomization: "Don't touch the randomiser unless you're okay with any result it might spit out."
It seems to me like there is this agreement that jumping of buildings will absolutely destroy your life despite teh fact that few people have ever even tried to do so in any capacity.

Sometimes, *SOMETIMES*, you don't need to experience something to be aware of how hazardous it is. The Deck of Many Things is one of those times, imho.
@BESW This is right up there with my First Law of Communication: "don't ask a question unless you're ready for the answer."
2:55 PM
Matthew Colville just cheats with the Deck of Many Things.
There's an oft-overlooked corollary to the above rule: Randomness isn't inherently interesting.
@nitsua60 "Roll on this table to decide which question to ask!"
@godskook People jump out of planes all of the time. So I put in a few parachutes and see what happens. To me, nothing in the deck is irreversible. And while a few cards might be "catastrophic" in the sense that a lot of stuff can change, none of them really immediately stand out to me as "welp, the game is over". If the parachutes don't open and the campaign falls to pieces, I'll enjoy the ride down.
@Adam The use of a hazard-reducing device(parachute) proves that the original thing is dangerous, not that its not dangerous.
I never said that the deck wasn't dangerous. Only that I would like to use it and I feel that it's reputation is perhaps a little overblown.
2:58 PM
Sure by placing a checkpoint in front of using the deck I think you could use it.
@Adam my point actually does lead to the conclusion that with yes, with enough safety devices, you can run a Deck of Many Things without it harming your game objectionably.
And in some cases, no safety devices might still result in survival, just like a person being able to survive a drop from terminal velocity without any significant injuries.
I am just pointing out how unreasonable it is to believe that one needs to try the Deck to understand that it is exceedingly dangerous.
@godskook Yeah, I suppose you're right.
Why not the Head of Vecna?
3:40 PM
How different are the Pathfinder and D&D versions of the deck?
We had one in some Pathfinder gritty campaign about escaping the Razmiran inquisition when you are lvl 4 and the divine magic is not working, and it was far from destroying the campaign. It made one of the PC pretty powerful and one decided to re-roll after drawing the cards, but the character was pretty destroyed even before drawing them
@AnneAunyme Mostly the same, but there are a few small differences. For example, in 5e the Moon card grants 1d3 wishes, not 1d4, and there is no time limit for when you can cast them. As another example, the vizier card in 5e explicitly states that you also gain the wisdom necessary to apply whatever answer you receive in a useful and unambiguous way.
3:57 PM
@NautArch apologies for the confusion on the question...I thought it was an interesting concept but it seems like others have different opinions
@A.B. No worries! I don't think there's confusion - it's more that I was trying to get ahead of a problem :)
Is there a way to link comments?
nitsua60 made a good comment on a different question that is relevant to mine, but I do not want to take any credit
@A.B. Click on the comment's timestamp to get the link.
@A.B. WHen you click on the timestamp, you'll need to copypasta the what's in your URL bar :)
Thank you for the help, although I also feel it's cheesy if I answer my own question with somebody else's comment
4:05 PM
I'm trying to Be Nice and not answer a comment on one of my answers
@A.B. What's the question/comment?
Relative to my question I asked from that question rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/103356/…
@A.B. Ah! I was at lunch. I'll craft an answer to that now =)
I didn't know how to contact you to answer using that comment, so I'm glad you stopped by :)
@NautArch I will be deleting my comment on your answer
@A.B. okaleedokalee. Adding your own answer? :D
4:10 PM
@NautArch I will wait for nitsua's answer, besides it feels cheesy to me to do that
Although I am still very green to the site
@A.B., if that someone else wants to answer themselves, I'd say to let htem, but in absence of that, the goal is to preserve good answers as answers, not let them die in teh comments.
@A.B. Bah! go for it - he doesn't need the rep :P Stick it to the man sheep.
@A.B. and that's more important than being frozen in indecision because the OP of the answer hasn't decided YET to post it as an official answer, imho.
@godskook you make very good points
Q: Let's unload [loaded-dice]

ConduitWhile poking around for interesting tags to fill my favorites I noticed loaded-dice. Currently there are only two questions tagged, and in both circumstances it seems to me that dice would suffice. Kill it with fire?

4:14 PM
@A.B., I'd also personally offer to delete my reproduction of their answer if they supplied their own answer, to allow reputation to flow where it "should".
i wonder if anyone will do the legwork for this question
@NautArch I would if the work filter allowed me to view the link you posted :P
@A.B. haha - you can't get to dndbeyond.com? That's a bummer.
I'm not a fan of questions that are simply a matter of effort, not of understanding.
@NautArch Not me. And I've already got all the spells in my own spreadsheet that I made before D&DBeyond arrived, so it'd only take a minute or so.
@NautArch this.
4:20 PM
@nitsua60 I'm going to risk downvotes and add that as a comment to my answer.
@NautArch downvote at the ready
Btw, @A.B. thanks for that question--I've been waiting years to have a chance to slip onto the site the origin of owlbears.
@A.B. updated my answer to include a bit about this. Preparing the lifeboats.
In any case, it's not "a wizard did it." At least, not in the Realms.
@nitsua60 I was never a guy who really dug into any type of lore, but that bit was rather interesting
4:25 PM
@nitsua60 link plz? I can't see which question of AB are you referring to.
@nitsua60 Gotta keep the story of important things alive!
@nitsua60 are those sorts of home compilations legal to link to here? I'm guessing yes.
4:41 PM
@nitsua60 Is Bhaal statted as a Wizard, tho? Cause if he is in at least some editions, then....... :P
what are we downvoting?
@BanjoFox me
but @Adam is a better man illithid than me :)
@NautArch You spelled Thoon wrong :p
4:54 PM
@nitsua60 Thanks for answering my question earlier, and inadvertently clarifying once again that our DM is definitely bending the rules to accomplish whatever goals he has in mind for our party (he gave the rogue the sneak attack bonus claiming the Cloak of Displacement illusion hadn't kicked in yet, as I described in my question)
@B.S.Morganstein How does that help you?
@B.S.Morganstein remember, though, not all "DM rule bends" are intentional. Many of them are the DM making good-faith table-rulings.
@B.S.Morganstein You know your DM better than any of us, but it seems more likely it's a lack of understanding the rules rather than bending them.
Not sure if that applies in this case, but that's a general truth.
@NautArch Nah, I'm just a squid that happened to just start his lunch break
4:59 PM
@Adam Enabler :P
@NautArch, how competitive are 5e spells when cast from higher slots compared to naturally higher level spells?
@NautArch That's a good question. In fact, good enough I'm not sure what I think, and encourage you take to meta. "If I compile a table of blah blah, would it be appropriate to post here?" My inclination is that "12% abjuration, 16% conjuration, 9% divination..." would be fine, but including the whole compilation would be reproducing more of copyrighted information than is really necessary to answer such a question.
@godskook Bhaal's not statted in my 1e Deities & Demigods, which is the most-recent reference for that sort of thing I've got on my shelf =)
@godskook that's a really good question! I'm not sure and it may be impacted by what you're trying to do (damage vs effects)
@godskook this.
5:15 PM
@NautArch Let's assume damage. Cause "how common is this damage type" is an inherently flawed question low-level spells cast from high-level slots are able to "keep up". Eventually the answer becomes "as common as the caster chooses to prepare them".
@godskook I have software support remoting into my machine right now, so can't do much. But that's a really good point.
@NautArch - Just give me a second so I can finish this MitM then I will let you have your cursor back :D
@B.S.Morganstein No worries--I'd second, though, godskook's point that it may not be malicious, or even intentional, rule-bending.
@godskook Well, I don't have the know how to compile a complete and logically sound answer to that. But common wisdom at my table is that upcasting a spell isn't usually as good as a spell naturally of a certain level in terms of just damage. The usual example is burning hands, which when upcast to 3rd level deals 5d6, versus a level 3 fireball which deals 8d6 over a much wider area.
@Adam that's ignoring opportunity-cost of preparation slots, though?
So it's not just a question of 8d6 > 5d6, it's "do I think 8d6 > 5d6 plus another preparation-slot?"
5:21 PM
It's ignoring a lot of things, which is why I said it isn't complete or logically sound.
@nitsua60 the idea I'm approaching this from is that high-level wizards will just prepare damage of every type if each damage-type is roughly competitive at that stage of the game.
@godskook Yeah, the difference of a die or two, vs. the impact of being able to beat resistance or not... go broad, in my book.
@nitsua60 which leads me to the conclusion that rpg.stackexchange.com/q/103361/35386 is a fundamentally flawed thing to look at for providing useful information.
Since a past level 1 spells, the solution to not having a spell of that level prepared to cast is to upcast the right damage-type from from a lower spell level.
@godskook Yeah, in terms of preparing a character, I agree. Might be useful if I were designing D&D, as a way to spot unintended aggregate-effects.
@godskook @NautArch @nitsua60 Thanks for the heads up - could be DM error, could be malicious, but good to know that something is off that is not my understanding of RAW
5:30 PM
@godskook I believe that if you don't include a ping in your comment, it automatically pings the original poster anyway.
@B.S.Morganstein A possibly useful reference concerning that: rpg.stackexchange.com/a/73853/35386
@godskook Thanks for the link! I don't have any intention of getting into an extended argument with the DM over RAW vs DM interpretation, but good to have as a resource anyway
@B.S.Morganstein Yeah, use at your leisure.
@B.S.Morganstein If you can create a framework for those discussions, I highly recommend it. I don't have one and live in a "my way or the highway" table.
@NautArch Speaking of highways... I'm driving up to VT on Friday after work. Stockbridge-and-vicinity might be a good place/time to stop for a quick bite. You around?
5:53 PM
cries a little bit
@BanjoFox Eh?
6:15 PM
@godskook - programming frustration
@BanjoFox I weep with you
@nitsua60 oooh - let me check, but after work evenings are generally Kiddoo time :)
especially since I've got a gamenight tomorrow
I smell a new player on the front page
@NautArch Usually the same for me, but this week I'm headed up to a friend's farm for my ridiculous pentathlon =D
@nitsua60 that sounds pretty amazing/awful
6:23 PM
It is, indeed, amazful.
@nitsua60 I'd probably get a stroke well before 4.
... now I'm questioning my choice of "bbq steak and cheese" sammich for lunch
@BanjoFox 'cause it's only 700 cal?
@nitsua60 - -730- 980 actually
@BanjoFox Not bad, sight unseen, eh?
6:35 PM
.... -.- I just want to do the stupid strikethrough thing! ;-;
@BanjoFox 3 times -
980 must be including either fries or drink, no?
@nitsua60 - It tasted okay considering the source (Wawa convenience store) but when I came back here you guys were talking about strokes
@BanjoFox Nobody does it better than WAWA!
(Or frying the bun in the fat that came off the burger... I've spent an unreasonable amount of time trying to get the calorie-count on a burger up above 1K.)
@NautArch Sheetz!, man!
6:38 PM
beef steak, bbq sauce, provolone, wheat classic (10") roll -- 980
@nitsua60 Did you fry the burger in fatback?
@BanjoFox Oh, a 10" roll. So it's like, 2 burgers?
@nitsua60 - yeah probably? It's "Hoagiefest" so their "classic" hoagies are all $4.99USD
Also... this bbc.com/news/health-30000934 "Luther Burger"
@BanjoFox BBQ Beef is a classic? They didn't have that when I was growing up.
@NautArch - I guess? I just clicked the "hoagiefest" button and picked from that list
normally I get an Italian with mods
6:44 PM
@BanjoFox Yeah yeah. See: Classic Rock stations playing Guns n Roses
@BanjoFox I just want to have my font be comic-sans
@NautArch - I know the feeling
@godskook - <font:"comic-sans">Like this?</font>
@BanjoFox Yes, LIKE that.
@godskook - you mean it doesn't work for you?
You mean it DOES work for you?
@BanjoFox that's what I'm getting
6:54 PM
:D no not really... I actually photo edited your screenshot and am now ashamed
p {
font-family: "Comic Sans MS", cursive, sans-serif;
00:00 - 19:0019:00 - 00:00

« first day (2477 days earlier)      last day (1443 days later) »